Ultra HD vs Full HD. Which one is better?

[ARF]

It's interesting to use a 24-inch 1080p and a 24-inch 2160p monitors at the same time.
While sitting in front of them, interesting things become obvious.

Look:

Ultra HD:


Full HD:


How do you think?

 

[bubbleawsome]

Wouldn't they look like that regardless of screen size? I agree 4k makes a noticeable difference even on smaller screens than most people think, but you can't tell how it'd look in real life from this.

 

[Regeneration]

Bad comparison. Text on 1080p should be sharp as well

 

[ARF]

Wouldn't they look like that regardless of screen size?

Well, maybe not. On larger than 24-inch monitors, 4K should start losing its clarity, too.
Here, it's an apples vs apples comparison. Missing is only a deeper analysis as to how many pixels form those letters.
The 24-inch monitor with its relatively high pixel density and quite small physical dots makes the font very, very crisp and clear.

The 1080p monitor uses 1/4 of the pixels to visualize the same letters, you can see very obvious pixelisation.

Wouldn't they look like that regardless of screen size? I agree 4k makes a noticeable difference even on smaller screens than most people think, but you can't tell how it'd look in real life from this.

 

[cucker tarlson]

had a 21.5 1080p one
dunno about text but games sure looked pixelated even on a screen this small

24 1440p is the shizznit

 

[agent_x007]

If your text/icons aren't sharp, maybe you are not using best ClearType settings ?
Also, if you have problems seeing stuff on the screen, you should use Windows scaling option to make everything bigger (no need to buy 4k monitor if you simply want to see stuff better).

 

[bubbleawsome]

Well, maybe not. On larger than 24-inch monitors, 4K should start losing its clarity, too.
Here, it's an apples vs apples comparison. Missing is only a deeper analysis as to how many pixels form those letters.
The 24-inch monitor with its relatively high pixel density and quite small physical dots makes the font very, very crisp and clear.

The 1080p monitor uses 1/4 of the pixels to visualize the same letters, you can see very obvious pixelisation.

I mean without windows scaling they will have the same number of pixels no matter if the screen is 10” or 85”. A screenshot doesn’t show us the relative clarity at 24”

If your text/icons aren't sharp, maybe you are not using best ClearType settings ?
Also, if you have problems seeing stuff on the screen, you should use Windows scaling option to make everything bigger (no need to buy 4k monitor if you simply want to see stuff better).

Even with the best clear type settings I can get on my laptop 1080p looks noticeably worse than 4k.

 

[agent_x007]

@bubbleawsome
So... you are using 1080p resolution on 4k native LCD ?
Or do you have two seperate laptops, one with FullHD, and other one with 4k screens ?

 

[ARF]

I mean without windows scaling they will have the same number of pixels no matter if the screen is 10” or 85”. A screenshot doesn’t show us the relative clarity at 24”

Scaling at Ultra HD:




Scaling at Full HD:




At 175% you still gain more workspace with Ultra HD vs Full HD.

 

[Frick]

Problem is scaling is far from perfect. I could never live with scaling, I run far to many old/weird games and programs for it to be plausible. Also it depends on the desktop. Higher than 1080p on 24" would kill my eyes.

 

[ARF]

Problem is scaling is far from perfect. I could never live with scaling, I run far to many old/weird games and programs for it to be plausible. Also it depends on the desktop. Higher than 1080p on 24" would kill my eyes.

It's because of Microsoft's terrible job and lack of development support for transition to high-PPI monitors.
For instance, Winamp, you need to adjust every time manually, every time means every single launch of the app.

Microsoft lives as if it's still year 2006.

 

[EarthDog]

It's interesting to use a 24-inch 1080p and a 24-inch 2160p monitors at the same time.
While sitting in front of them, interesting things become obvious.

Look:

Ultra HD:


Full HD:


How do you think?

How do I think? Not sure what that even means... I'm a visual learner if that is what you are asking.

As far as your images... what do you want us to say? Pixel density is a hell of a lot less on 24" 1080p vs 4K. You have more pixels in a given space and imperfect scaling. Makes sense to me what you're seeing.

 

[agent_x007]

I think the image comparison is kinda wrong, since you don't see a blurry image on your lower res screen.
You simply get blocky pixels at the edges if you try to read it with magnifying glass (I can't see pixels/blockiness on my 24" 1200p screen from a foot and a change [0,5 meter] away).

In short : 1920x1080 image shouldn't have been enlarged to 4k size, but instead simply made smaller (since that's how it looks when it's send to monitor) OR you should have taken a photo of 1080p 24" screen and 4k 24" screen at the same scaling value, showing the same view.

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

I think the image comparison is kinda wrong, since you don't see a blurry image on your lower res screen.
You simply get blocky pixels at the edges if you try to read it with magnifying glass (I can't see pixels/blockiness on my 24" 1200p screen from a foot and a change [0,5 meter] away).

In short : 1920x1080 image shouldn't have been enlarged to 4k size, but instead simply made smaller (since that's how it looks when it's send to monitor) OR you should have taken a photo of 1080p 24" screen and 4k 24" screen at the same scaling value, showing the same view.

That's not making sense, shrinking the 4k or blowing up the 1080p = the same thing.


Get your eyeballs involved and 4k has significantly better image quality.

I use both a 4k and a high Hz 1080p the difference is noteworthy.

 

[agent_x007]

@theoneandonlymrk OK... I don't doubt 4k having "better image quality" part.
But since you also use 1080p screen :
Is your settings icon or command prompt icon as blurry as you can see in the OP's picture ?
Because my isn't.

 

[P4-630]

Ultra HD vs Full HD. Which one is better?

Of the 2 I'd prefer the Ultra HD with higher dpi.

interesting things become obvious.

Just 4K gaming would be a horrible experience with your Radeon RX 560X 4G....

 

[ARF]

Of the 2 I'd prefer the Ultra HD with higher dpi.



Just 4K gaming would be a horrible experience with your Radeon RX 560X 4G....

Yes, because it has only 4GB of memory. But 1440p works just fine.

OK... I don't doubt 4k having "better image quality" part.
But, is your settings icon as blurry on 1080p screen you use, as you can see in the OP's picture ?
Because, my isn't.

Some lower quality, older TN 1080p panels produce exactly that image.

 

[EarthDog]

Yes, because it has only 4GB of memory. But 1440p works just fine.

or because the card is a damn potato requiring IQ losses at 1440p to reach 60 fps... i can't imagine that thing on 4k uhd.. lol

 

[agent_x007]

Some lower quality, older TN 1080p panels produce exactly that image.

My exact image looks like this :

No blurryness you shown, but it does get blocky at this close distance (10cm or 4" from screen).
I do use 1920x1200 screen and not 1080p one (it's old Samsung T240).
PS. Oh and Windows DPI scaling is at 100%.

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

@theoneandonlymrk OK... I don't doubt 4k having "better image quality" part.
But since you also use 1080p screen :
Is your settings icon or command prompt icon as blurry as you can see in the OP's picture ?
Because my isn't.

I know the edge's are less sharp , but I have not looked that close to the icons to be honest.
With less pixels to make each letter, that's the law though and clear type doesn't mitigate physics.

I do notice this more in game's or watching videos then on the desktop.

It's likely clear type set incorrectly making his blurry, blurry wasn't noted by him or me but now you mentioned it .

 

[ARF]

It's likely clear type set incorrectly

There is no such thing. Both systems are defaults.

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

There is no such thing. Both systems are defaults.

Well he will have to send me both monitors for good look then if I'm on the hook to fix it.

So what we fixing again?.

Ah yes how do I think.

I'd say using my brain but some say ideas emerge from my ass.

 

[ARF]

Recommended for my monitor is 150% but everything is just with wrong sizes, so I make it 175%..

 

[Frick]

It's because of Microsoft's terrible job and lack of development support for transition to high-PPI monitors.
For instance, Winamp, you need to adjust every time manually, every time means every single launch of the app.

Microsoft lives as if it's still year 2006.

Sure, and that many programs predate that year anyway. I'd rather take backwards compatibilty than perfect scaing.

 

[Vya Domus]

It's all about the pixel structure, which isn't visible on a 4K display. I sit in front of a 1 meter 4K TV and I cannot discern the pixels, if it was a 1080p panel I could see the pixel grid from as far back as 2-3 meters.